Primary Education Networkhttp://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/primaryeducationnetwork
UoN primary team's blogFri, 06 Jul 2018 06:52:13 +0000en-UShourly1https://wordpress.org/?v=4.9.7http://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/primaryeducationnetwork/files/2016/09/cropped-temporary-blog-pic-2-32x32.jpgPrimary Education Networkhttp://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/primaryeducationnetwork
3232PrimaryEducationNetworkhttps://feedburner.google.comHow to make the world a better place: teach children how to thinkhttp://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/primaryeducationnetwork/2018/07/06/make-world-better-place-teach-children-think/
http://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/primaryeducationnetwork/2018/07/06/make-world-better-place-teach-children-think/#respondFri, 06 Jul 2018 06:52:13 +0000http://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/primaryeducationnetwork/?p=3472Teachers generally believe that education can make the world a better place, but we need to realise there is some good news, and some bad news about this. In this post, John Perry reflects on the place of thinking skills in our schools. Firstly, some good news: schools are improving. More children achieve more highly ...

Currently the English school system is geared towards proving that teachers teach, rather than developing children’s intelligence. This is obviously counter-productive. We need a system which enables all children to become genuinely intelligent, rather than to simply know lots of stuff. This is not to deny the importance of knowledge, nor even the importance of exams. My concern is that we are so focused on examination outcomes that we neglect teaching children to be thinkers.

Thirdly, some really good news: there is overwhelming evidence that we can teach children to become intelligent, thinking people who do more than just ‘know stuff’ for their exams.

Recently, along with colleagues at Liverpool Hope University and Plymouth Marjon University, I have carried out a literature review about one way to help children develop their intelligence: thinking skills. When you look at the available evidence, it quickly becomes clear that no matter where you look, teaching thinking skills is a good thing.

‘Thinking skills’ is an umbrella term, but it is one of the things which makes us human. As far as we know, humans are the only species who can actively and deliberately plan how we think about things. The earliest evidence of this is about 150000 years old, and is central to our evolution (Chein and Schneider, 2012). In the classroom, thinking skills can include a huge range of teaching techniques, such as writing frames, concept maps or questioning for example, which can really help to develop children’s cognitive control when taught by schools in a systematic way. The important thing which such strategies have in common is that they develop children’s abilities to be in control of their own learning, and thus become more independent and autonomous.

There has been a fair degree of research into thinking skills since the late 1970s. John Flavell is generally acknowledged to have started this field of research (Flavell, 1979), but it is important to note that his work almost echoes some of the work of Vygotsky. Over the years the research has grown so that we can now look at various meta-analyses, such as The Education Endowment Foundation which suggests that teaching thinking skills can add 7 months progress to a child’s development; John Hattie suggests a strong effect size of 0.53; and there are many other studies which we report on in the Educational Review article which also suggest hugely positive effect sizes.

The evidence clearly suggests that teaching metacognition is beneficial at any age; it is beneficial for SEND children; it is beneficial for EAL students; there are even early indications that it can help to diminish the disadvantaged gap. What’s not to love?

So, what can be done?

Teachers, no matter what age group they teach, can introduce thinking skills to their lessons. By adopting strategies such as Mind Maps or writing frames, for example, teachers can simultaneously help children to learn how to learn, as well as teaching more conventional knowledge.

Schools can adopt whole-school approaches to the systematic teaching of thinking skills, and the evidence suggests that this is far more effective than when individual teachers work alone. Some useful strategies are suggested in the EEF’s 2018 metacognition report and there are various approaches which can be developed, such as Building Learning Power, but there is nothing to stop schools developing their own bespoke programmes for their own contexts.

At a system level, the government could add thinking skills to the National Curriculum or the Standards for Teachers. Looking beyond the English system, many of the countries and jurisdictions which successive governments have looked to for inspiration use thinking skills in their curricula. Hong Kong, Shanghai and Finland all make use of thinking skills in their classrooms, yet England does not.

Why is this? I think there are at least three reasons.

Firstly, the development of a coherent thinking skills curriculum is not a quick option

Secondly, it is difficult to measure thinking skills, and the government likes to measure things

Thirdly, not long ago we had Personal Learning and Thinking Skills (PLTS), which would have helped to place England as a world leader in thinking skills in the classroom. Unfortunately PLTS suffered from ‘Framework Fatigue’ and was a strategy too far for most schools, coming as it did on the back of the National Literacy Strategy, the National Numeracy Strategy, Extended Schools etc. This is a shame, but understandable. There is only so much that schools, teachers and school leaders can do with the meagre resources they have.

So, perhaps the best that teachers can do is to take back a little control for themselves and begin to teach children how to think and learn, alongside conventional knowledge. After all, surely we would rather have generations of intelligent, independent thinkers, rather than generations of automatons who know lots of stuff, but can’t think for themselves. Such an approach will, I believe, make the world a better place.

]]>http://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/primaryeducationnetwork/2018/07/06/make-world-better-place-teach-children-think/feed/0The world in your classroom: using technology to inspire and engagehttp://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/primaryeducationnetwork/2018/06/04/world-classroom-using-technology-inspire-engage/
http://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/primaryeducationnetwork/2018/06/04/world-classroom-using-technology-inspire-engage/#respondMon, 04 Jun 2018 06:13:59 +0000http://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/primaryeducationnetwork/?p=3612Technology is increasingly prevalent in schools but not necessarily used to best effect as a learning resource, as noted in an international context by the OECD in this 2015 report. In this post, Rachel Walker from Sneinton C of E Primary School in Nottingham shares her experiences of using technology in a productive way. I ...

Technology is increasingly prevalent in schools but not necessarily used to best effect as a learning resource, as noted in an international context by the OECD in this 2015 report. In this post, Rachel Walker from Sneinton C of E Primary School in Nottingham shares her experiences of using technology in a productive way.

I have grown up in that generation for whom technology is a normal part of life. Using computers is, for me, second nature, even if I did have to submit GCSE coursework using a floppy disc! While I know that we as teachers are the best resource for students that money can buy, there are now so many technological tools which make the classroom into an even more exciting place to be. I have come to see that technology can be your greatest ally, making your life easier and your lessons more engaging, rich and exciting.

It is vital that as teachers we get the balance right. While technology can be amazing, and will almost guarantee you instant engagement with your class, it can also, if we are not careful, be the world’s biggest distraction. I am sure we have all experienced the lesson where we visit the ICT suite with 30 excitable children, only to find twelve working computers, or decide to try out a new app, to be disappointed to discover that each child needs a separate email address in order to make it work. However, I am here to persuade you that not only is it worth the effort to persevere with it, but also that it is essential practice for a generation for whom technology is a ready-integrated part of life. Some of these issues are explored in this 2016 article from the Cambridge Primary Review.

Pedagogically, we can even get a more accurate idea of what our children can and can’t do, allowing them to express their learning in new and creative ways.

So what are some simple, reliable ways in, so we can really make the most of this incredible tool.

Try using tablets as a camera

If you have tablets, even one between two, they can be an excellent tool for demonstrating learning. Go on a ‘noun hunt’ or a ‘shape hunt’, asking children to take pictures of what they find, which they can come back and share with one another.

The amazing green screen!

Download the app ‘DoInk’ and get a large piece of green display paper. The world is now your oyster! Put a picture of a weather report as the background and get younger children to describe the weather for their speaking and listening skills, take a photo of children running from a dinosaur to use as a writing stimulus, ask the children to write a poem about volcanoes and perform it in front of an actual volcano… so many possibilities! Put this together with iMovie and children can produce actual television programmes.

Make it fun with just a teacher’s device – ‘Decide Now’

There are loads of fun little apps which can just spice up ‘drier’ subjects like grammar. One that I love is called ‘Decide Now’ which is a simple spinner app which you can put onto your teacher iPad. I have lots of different spinners for different grammar topics, for example ‘choose the tense’. The spinner will then choose ‘past, present or future’, and then children have 5 minutes to write three sentences in that tense.

Go on a free school trip with Google Expeditions

Google Expeditions is simply amazing! If you’re not sure about it, you can actually book Google to come in and do a sample session for you, however it is really quite easy to use. You as the teacher sign up as a ‘Guide’ to an expedition, and the children come on board as ‘Explorers’ on their devices. You need to be connected to the same WiFi network. However, even if all the children don’t have their own devices, you can also just mirror your device to the board and take them on an adventure. I’ve used it in lots of contexts: we explored the rainforest, to find out what different habitats looked like, visited the pyramids of Egypt, and explored Antarctica when we needed exciting vocabulary for poems.

Consider how children can share their work, with you and one another.

There are now several platforms available which can act as a sort of ‘journal’ for you to collect in work. Seesaw is a fantastic tool, especially for younger children; children sign in by scanning a QR code within the app, you can record voice instructions for them to follow, and they can then ‘like’ and comment on one another’s work. I love this for peer evaluation and feedback. Showbie is also brilliant, where you can set assignments as well as having a class discussion. If you have iPads, AirDrop is a very simple way to collect in work. Ask children to save or screenshot what they have done (press the ‘home’ and top button at the same time) and then share it with you using Bluetooth via AirDrop. You can then select all the pictures at the same time and hit ‘print’: evidence for books!

Formative Assessment: Use Plickers and Kahoot

If you only have a teacher iPad, Plickers app is a brilliant tool for formative assessment. You just print a little card for each child (available on the web version of the app) and set a multiple choice question. They then hold the card whichever way up they think (each side is labelled with a letter) and you scan the room. It then tells you exactly who has got the question right and wrong.

Kahoot is essentially an advanced version of this, and acts like a game show. Each child needs their own device for this, but you set up a set of questions and then children log in using a simple 6-digit code and write their name, and then away you go! The great thing about this is that it gives you a breakdown of who got each question right. Bear in mind it gets very exciting and very noisy… what better way to do an end of unit assessment?

Explanation skills: create a video

If you have tablets which have a video camera (most do), then you’ll be able to get the children recording videos of themselves. I do this most often at the end of a maths topic, where the hook will be something like, ‘The year 3s have no idea what division actually means! Can you record a video to help them to understand it?’ You could then have a competition for the best explanation, where only the best three get shown. Such a brilliant engagement tool!

Ways of sharing understanding

Another great app, especially if you are used to asking children to use tablets as a research tool using the internet, is PicCollage. It’s often used to collate pictures of school events or practical lessons, but it’s brilliant for the children to use, for example flow charts. I’ve used it to ask children to record the journey of food from grower to supermarket, as they can they make it look brilliant but also instantly add pictures from the internet – but it’s very tricky to copy and paste, so they have to do the hard work!

Make use of a mirroring tool, such as ‘AirServer’ to use as a visualiser

I know so many teachers who love visualisers – they are such a great way of showing what children can do, as well as modelling without having to amplify using a whiteboard. With the correct software, you can use an iPad or tablet as a visualiser. AirServer costs around £10 per device, and you can then load it on your laptop and mirror your iPad to it. If the children are using iPads too, you can ask them to put theirs on the screen instantly as well.

I now love buying Kindle versions of our class books and mirroring to the screen while reading, meaning children can read along. They now complain if I don’t display it on the screen!

Give yourself a break with flipped learning

Flipped learning is a whole other blog in and of itself, however the concept can be really simple. Share a video of yourself teaching something (our Year 2 teacher did a simple handwriting exercise to try it out) with the class and then let them watch it and complete the task. They can watch it as many times as they like. You then don’t need to repeat yourself, and can target support as and when it’s needed. I use Apple Clips app to add subtitles as well so that children can pause the video and read it too. Headphones work a treat but if you don’t have them, children can share tablets and have it quietly and it still works.

So technology really can open doors for our students and not just for researching online. Be brave, try things out, and see where it takes you.

What are your experiences of bringing learning to life with technology?

]]>http://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/primaryeducationnetwork/2018/06/04/world-classroom-using-technology-inspire-engage/feed/0Why Philosophy with children?http://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/primaryeducationnetwork/2018/04/25/why-philosophy-with-children/
http://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/primaryeducationnetwork/2018/04/25/why-philosophy-with-children/#respondWed, 25 Apr 2018 16:49:00 +0000http://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/primaryeducationnetwork/?p=3162 In this post, Sally Betteridge considers the benefits of doing Philosophy with children and shares her experiences. Is it a ‘nice’ added extra or an essential part of children’s education? Children taking part in Philosophy lessons has been an area of discussion for many years. With an already very busy Primary curriculum it’s not ...

In this post, Sally Betteridge considers the benefits of doing Philosophy with children and shares her experiences.

Is it a ‘nice’ added extra or an essential part of children’s education?

Children taking part in Philosophy lessons has been an area of discussion for many years. With an already very busy Primary curriculum it’s not surprising that it is something that gets overlooked and as it is not a compulsory National Curriculum subject, it may be viewed as not important or worthwhile. However, research from the likes of Robin Alexander and Neil Mercer and going back to Lev Vygotsky shows the strong link between between spoken language, learning and cognitive development, as in this paper by Lyn Dawes and Claire Sams, for example.

There is much research indicating that children who take part in regular Philosophy sessions benefit in a number of ways:

The use of dialogue and the open ended creative nature of Philosophy sessions increases cognitive ability

Because of the open-ended themes for discussion and the aim of listening to others and building empathy, it enhances mental health and wellbeing and increases confidence, self-esteem, reflection and feelings of inclusion

Social skills are also developed as an emphasis is put on listening and speaking skills, and being able to disagree respectfully

Critical thinking skills are developed as well as children’s ability to be creative and imagine possibilities. It allows them to become field independent and spontaneously adaptive

It creates a safe space to discuss challenging issues, which might not ever be discussed elsewhere, allowing children to understand that people’s opinions can differ from their own and that it is OK to change your mind about things.

In the 21st Century, creativity in both thinking and learning is now firmly established as a necessary skill for life and is essential to be successful within a rapidly changing world. As well as this, much research shows that creative development is linked to a wider enjoyment of school. If children enjoy school more and link learning to enjoyment then they are more likely to be successful. When taking part in Philosophy, children are developing these essential critical thinking skills and learning how to negotiate and adapt and be creative with their ideas. They are also learning to question the world. A Philosophy session once a week that feeds in to the rest of the children’s learning could be said to be laying the foundations for learning, to enable them to learn about learning and to develop the characteristics of creativity. Through Philosophy, they learn to really comprehend and use these comprehension skills for a purpose, to problem solve, to look for alternatives when working through a problem and to question truths, to name but a few – all of the skills needed to be a successful learner in any subject.

From my own experience of doing a weekly Philosophy session with my class, I found that it was so much more than a one-hour session a week. In my opinion, it was the most important hour that I did. It established the working ethos in my classroom and built respect and rapport. The children were understanding of each other and each other’s differences and needs. They learned that their classmates and I were interested in what they had to say. Everyone was on a level playing field as we didn’t need any specific knowledge to be involved and to be successful. The children began to self-regulate their behaviour and any problems they had in the classroom as we had a shared understanding. They could often sort their social problems out between themselves by entering in to a shared dialogue. The behaviour for learning in the classroom was set and the way we established our community of inquiry in our Philosophy time permeated throughout the rest of the week. The thinking skills they developed were utilised in every other subject. So I believe that it was the most important hour of my week. At the start of this film is a brief example of one of my philosophy discussions.

When the children were interviewed about their Philosophy sessions, as part of an inquiry project, they commented that:

It allowed them to really think and have lots of ideas

It gave them time to actually think rather than being rushed

It allowed them to understand the people in their class better

The focussing exercise allowed them to relax and focus and they used the focussing exercise in other areas of their life, such as when they argued with their sibling at home or when they were faced with a challenge.

Developing children’s personal and social skills and building their self-esteem and enhancing their knowledge of life and the world around them is essential for their learning power and for success in life; Philosophy is a very valuable way of developing all of these skills.

I followed the Thinking through Philosophy programme devised by Paul Cleghorn when I first began and then, as I developed as a facilitator of the sessions, I developed my own materials and ways of working.

In a lesson on the theme of beauty observed in an Ofsted inspection, the children were able to discuss complex issues on a story that was used as the ‘stimulus’:

The teacher immediately captured pupils’ attention by an effective calming exercise to ensure that all were concentrating fully on the events in the classroom. When the mood was perfect, the teacher moved quietly on to a sensitive reading of ‘The Butterfly’. This clearly had an inspirational impact on the pupils who sat totally still, transfixed by the story. The teacher then teased out of pupils their interpretation of a complex tale of happiness lost and found. They started uncertainly but the teacher gave them such confidence that before long all were keen to contribute. They spoke eloquently about the meaning of beauty, how different people see it and how they find it. One pupil explained, you can’t just find happiness you have to create it. It’s like when I spend time with my family at weekends – it’s a special time for me. By now, the teacher’s work was largely done. Pupils listened respectfully to the views of others and responded with “I agree but…” or “I disagree because…”. In this way, they delved even more deeply into the story and were soon debating how the author had ‘hidden’ symbols of beauty in the text. It was a remarkable lesson that got the very best out of the pupils.

(Taken from the Ofsted report)

In this inspection it was stated that,

“The introduction of ‘Philosophy for Children’ has provided excellent opportunities for pupils to develop an understanding of citizenship and explore the relationship between man and society. These lessons, focusing on giving pupils the skills and confidence to think deeply about issues, are having a very good effect on pupils’ discussion in all lessons and have quickly become an important aspect of the curriculum.”

So, if these are the skills that we want to develop in young people and these are the skills that employers are looking for and skills that are needed to be successful in a rapidly changing world, it seems a sensible way forward for children to be taking part in lessons where these skills are developed.

What are your thoughts? We would love to hear them:

Do you do Philosophy in your classroom and, if so, what is the impact?

Would you like to do Philosophy but time is an issue?

Have you done Philosophy in the past but have stopped? What were the reasons for this?

]]>http://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/primaryeducationnetwork/2018/04/25/why-philosophy-with-children/feed/0Teachers and research evidence: building engagementhttp://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/primaryeducationnetwork/2018/03/19/teachers-research-evidence-building-engagement/
http://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/primaryeducationnetwork/2018/03/19/teachers-research-evidence-building-engagement/#respondMon, 19 Mar 2018 16:45:50 +0000http://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/primaryeducationnetwork/?p=2992The move towards a research-engaged teaching profession, working in an evidence-informed way seems to be gaining momentum. The recently established Chartered College of Teaching, highlights as one of its three central aims well informed teachers, with access to ‘high quality research’ and promotes this through its own journal, database and research summaries; meanwhile, the teacher-led ...

The move towards a research-engaged teaching profession, working in an evidence-informed way seems to be gaining momentum.

The recently established Chartered College of Teaching, highlights as one of its three central aims well informed teachers, with access to ‘high quality research’ and promotes this through its own journal, database and research summaries; meanwhile, the teacher-led ResearchEd movement has gathered pace internationally. What does this really mean on a day-to-day basis for teachers and how might we harness this growing interest in a productive and manageable way? In this post Rupert Knight explores some of the opportunities available and looks at how one group of teachers has worked on this.

Why an interest in research evidence?

The idea that teachers might engage with research evidence to inform their practice is closely associated with the issue of professional status. Most definitions of any profession include reference to some sort of specialised body of knowledge and the idea of having ownership of this knowledge seems to be important. For example, the BERA / RSA report ‘Research and the Teaching Profession’ in 2014, in its vision for a ‘research-rich self-improving education system’, positions research literacy as one dimension of a teacher’s professional identity. Nevertheless, the DfE’s 2017 report on progress towards evidence-informed teaching concluded that many schools were not yet strongly engaged with research and that ‘system change’ was needed to embed this into school culture.

What do we mean by research evidence in education?

Much of this is driven by a ‘what works’, or effectiveness, agenda. This can be seen in the high profile attempts to synthesise research findings in the form of rankings based on impact, such as John Hattie’s Visible Learning and the Education Endowment Fund (EEF)’s popular Teaching and Learning Toolkit. Many other research summaries are in circulation, such as What Makes Great Teaching, a high profile publication for the Sutton Trust in 2014 and, as a means of helping teachers to make sense of findings, a network of research schools now exists, tasked with helping schools to make the best use of evidence to improve teaching practice.

Attractive though it is for the busy professional, there are some limitations to this ‘what works’ view of research. Frequently, using a medical analogy to contrast pre-nineteenth century ‘quack’ doctors with subsequent ‘scientific’ advances, there is a tendency to valorise in particular certain forms of research such as randomised control trials (RCTs), as seen in Ben Goldacre’s Building Evidence into Education paper for the DfE. Robert Slavin goes as far as to suggest that looking for practices that are ‘evidence-based’ is inadequate. He suggests, again referring to medicine, that we should think instead of ‘evidence-proven’.

Others, however, have questioned the appropriateness of this scientific view and of RCTs for the complexity of the education environment and also noted the difficulty of a single definition of effectiveness when the purposes of education are potentially highly diverse. The EEF’s chief executive Kevan Collins argues for the development of a body of knowledge rather than an over-emphasis on any single study in this podcast. Gert Biesta also makes this point about the illusion of certainty and causality in this talk from 2013 and questions whether it is possible to specify ‘what works’ in education unless we are clear about the desired outcome we have in mind? Biesta refines the question to ‘What works for what?’

So maybe the debate needs to be reframed, as seen in the ‘What Matters’ network centred on the University of Nottingham. This group is asking other fundamental questions such as: What matters? What is education for? Who should decide?

What might this look like in practice?

Perhaps, therefore, the most important priority is to work towards a research-literate profession, going beyond a slavish implementation of findings, by initially collaborating on a small scale and focusing on meaningful, context-related questions.

One example of a useful initiative is the education journal club website run by Beth Greville-Giddings. Other groups of teachers have begun to investigate their own practice, either individually or collaboratively. An example of one group of schools responding to this wave of interest in research and evidence in education is provided by the Transform TSA and Trust in Nottingham and Derby. In the film below, Helen Fordham, one of the associate head teachers, reflects on the process of research and dissemination in the primary school. Helen contributed a chapter to the book Evidence-Based Teaching in Primary Education in which she explores a specific Y6 project.

So one of the key messages here seems to be that research engagement has potential for everyone at some level or other. Starting small but collaboratively may allow you to build confidence in exploring your own interests and priorities. And at the heart of all of this are common themes familiar to all teachers, (if all too easily lost in day-to-day routines): reflecting on what we do, developing new ideas and sharing good practice.

It would be great to hear your thoughts:

What do you think matters most in education? What is education for?

What do you see as the potential contribution of research to your practice?

Who could you collaborate with and where could you start?

]]>http://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/primaryeducationnetwork/2018/03/19/teachers-research-evidence-building-engagement/feed/0Realising the wider purpose of teaching Modern Languages through integrative approacheshttp://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/primaryeducationnetwork/2018/02/16/realising-wider-purpose-teaching-modern-languages-integrative-approaches/
http://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/primaryeducationnetwork/2018/02/16/realising-wider-purpose-teaching-modern-languages-integrative-approaches/#respondFri, 16 Feb 2018 08:46:58 +0000http://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/primaryeducationnetwork/?p=2851Language learning is now compulsory in primary schools in England. Although the move may initially have appeared as a bold one in 2014, when compared to earlier practice, much work developing capacity in primary schools preceded the change in policy. And much work continues to ensure the delivery of languages is maximised for the benefit ...

Language learning is now compulsory in primary schools in England. Although the move may initially have appeared as a bold one in 2014, when compared to earlier practice, much work developing capacity in primary schools preceded the change in policy. And much work continues to ensure the delivery of languages is maximised for the benefit of young learners.

In this blog, Ruth Koro explores the importance of early language learning in developing intercultural awareness, and suggests an integrative approach to best deliver this.

Many schools are benefitting from working in partnership with secondary teachers, either through existing partnerships with feeder schools, collaborative planning within trusts, or as part of the day-to-day practice in all-through schools. However, while collaborations exist, and while they should be explored further to ensure that language learning is seamless between primary and secondary schools, many teachers will be solely responsible for the planning and delivery of Modern Languageswithin their school.

Like many other subjects on the primary curriculum, making room for languages on a busy timetable, as well as ensuring that staff can deliver the content confidently, can prove challenging. But, whichever model your school has adopted, and no matter the constraints you may well be faced with, it is worthwhile keeping at the forefront of your thought two important questions:

Who are we teaching languages to?

Why does learning a second language matter in this day and age?

Who are we teaching languages to?

First and foremost, it is essential for all practitioners, regardless of phase or subject, to remember that our students come to us with a rich cultural – and linguistic – capital. This is important because, just as long as we do not accept a deficit discourse about our students who may be bilingual or multilingual, there is a wealth of experience in our classrooms, with students who could very well contribute to the learning of their peers – if not in the language being taught, at the very least in the skills required in the acquisition of a language. Drawing on this will serve to make the learning relevant and meaningful, to value diversity and to promote inclusion and community cohesion in schools.

The age factor is also an important one where languages are concerned. Although there is some debate about where the critical age for second language acquisition lies, there is much to be said for primary learners’ inquisitiveness and enthusiasm, both highly desirable attributes when learning other languages. Furthermore, it is also worth remembering that, despite Modern Languages being one of the Ebacc subjects in secondary schools, it is not as such a compulsory national curriculum subject after the age of 14 (although all pupils in maintained schools have a statutory entitlement to be able to study the subject). In addition, it is also worth remembering that, in this country, the national curriculum is not compulsory for all types of schools – (although all schools are required to teach a ‘balanced and broadly based curriculum’).Therefore, the teaching of Modern Languages in primary schools has a vital role to play in ensuring the provision of the opportunity that language learning represents for students.

Why does learning a second language matter in this day and age?

According to the National curriculum KS2 Languages programmes of study, studying languages ‘is a liberation from insularity and provides an opening to other cultures. A high-quality languages education should foster pupils’ curiosity and deepen their understanding of the world’

Developing pupils’ global citizenship is therefore paramount – and the above statement, it is hoped, merely confirmation of what many teachers will already know and believe. But the teaching of Modern Languages on its own, while contributing (like many other subjects) to the development of global citizenship, requires some careful planning.

The desire to develop our students into future global citizens requires teachers to develop their Intercultural Understanding (ICU). While many definitions exist, I would define ICU as ‘the willingness and ability to change one’s viewpoint in order to discover and understand otherness’.

In order to achieve this, ICU should be at the heart of the planning process, and rather than an add-on, should in effect be seen as one of the key desired outcomes when teaching Modern Languages.

So how do we go about teaching ICU?

Byram (2010) proposes that Contents and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) is the best approach to developing students’ ICU, within the usual constraints of the curriculum.

CLIL involves the teaching of other subject content through the medium of a foreign language (Coyle, Hood and Marsh, 2010). Coyle (1999) developed the ‘4 Cs Framework’ – combining the following as a framework to integrate learning and language learning:

Content

Communication

Cognition

Culture

CLIL has be found to offer many benefits: improving students’ motivation, developing their cognitive skills, as well as contributing to theirsubject content and language understanding – all the while developing their intercultural competence.

There are many ways to link other subjects with languages, and it may be a more achievable feat than for colleagues in secondary settings. No matter the subject content, a little creative thinking will go a long way. For instance, exploring aspects of life in a different historical period, while teaching the vocabulary of colours and the concept of gender agreement in languages

investigating the geography of different countries where the language is spoken, while understanding the formation of simple verbs in the present tense

teaching the use of the correct article while presenting technological inventions from the countries speaking the language

A key factor is the notion that, as opposed to other integrative models, when planning within a CLIL framework, both the subject content and the language content have parity. But beyond this, be as creative as you wish, and your students will reap the rewards.

If you would like to find out more, you may find the following useful:

]]>http://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/primaryeducationnetwork/2018/02/16/realising-wider-purpose-teaching-modern-languages-integrative-approaches/feed/0Mathematics Shanghai stylehttp://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/primaryeducationnetwork/2018/01/16/mathematics-shanghai-style/
http://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/primaryeducationnetwork/2018/01/16/mathematics-shanghai-style/#respondTue, 16 Jan 2018 17:12:22 +0000http://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/primaryeducationnetwork/?p=2601Three things I learnt from a mathematics lesson study during the Shanghai-England Primary Teacher Exchange The Exchange During November, the latest leg of the Shanghai-England primary exchange took place. This is the fourth year of an exchange of primary teachers organised by the Department for Education through local Maths Hubs. In September, two primary ...

Three things I learnt from a mathematics lesson study during the Shanghai-England Primary Teacher Exchange

The Exchange

During November, the latest leg of the Shanghai-England primary exchange took place. This is the fourth year of an exchange of primary teachers organised by the Department for Education through local Maths Hubs. In September, two primary teachers from each of the 35 National Maths Hubs had visited Shanghai and then in November the reciprocal visits took place. In this post, Matt Woodford considers some lessons learned from his participation.

As part of the exchange, Maths Hubs organised lesson studies for local practitioners to observe the Shanghai teachers and consider some key messages around teaching for mastery put forward by the NCETM. An example of a previous lesson study event is shown here. I had the privilege of watch a Chinese teacher (Fang) working with a mixed Year 5 and Year 6 class of approximately 30 students. The lesson study took place in a small rural school in Lincolnshire with about 50 teachers watching the lesson. Some academics have pointed out that the success of regions such as Shanghai in the PISA tests are really down to cultural factors. See Jerrim (2015) for a helpful discussion on why East Asian children do so well in PISA tests.

What I value about opportunities like this lesson study is that it allows me to consider what I can learn from Shanghai methods in an English setting. This doesn’t mean that everything they do should be copied – but it should be considered and used to challenge my thinking.

The Lesson

The lesson was the fourth in a series on efficient calculation. The first lesson had covered the commutative law, the second the associative law and the third the distributive law. (I was a little surprised to hear that each topic had been covered in one lesson so was looking forward to seeing the latest lesson in the series!). This fourth lesson required students to put all of that previous information together to find the most efficient ways to calculate answers to problems.

This isn’t going to be an account of the full lesson – as that may take up too much space! So much more happened than is recorded here. It’s also worth saying that the lesson highlighted to me a number of areas that Shanghai teachers can learn from practice in England. However, what I will try to focus on are some of the key ideas that I learnt and have challenged the way I think rather than saying what others should learn.

The opening problem

The lesson began with an opening problem designed to engage students and ascertain initial ideas. The students were asked them to find how many families would live in 25 tower blocks if each had 28 families within it.

How would you tackle this non-calculator problem? Try to think of a method – then try to think of alternative strategies.

The students I saw agreed a number sentence with their talk partner (of 25 x 28) – then most seemed to suggest a formal, or vertical, method to solve the problem.

The teacher worked through their suggested idea on the adjacent whiteboard before asking students to explain two alternative projected methods.

The first method required the use of the associative law whilst the second method required the distributive law. Both methods have been recreated below and are worth spending the time understanding.

Method 1Method 2

25 x 28 25 x 28

25 x (4 x 7) 25 x (20 + 8)

25 x 4 x 7 25 x 20 + 25 x 8

100 x 7 500 + 200

700 700

One of things I really enjoyed about the lesson is how the teacher then linked Method 2 with the formal method that many of the students had suggested. This had the twin effects of helping students gain a better understanding of the formal method but also a better understanding of method 2.

Concept clarification

The initial problem was then followed up with an example designed to clarify the concept and help students to follow an argument.

The students were asked to say whether the following working is right or wrong.

808 x 125
(101 x 8) x 125
101 x 125 + 8 x 125
This is a nice example that deliberately tries to expose misunderstandings and root out whether students are learning processes as methods or whether they have a genuine understanding of mathematical structures being used.

Final thoughts: lessons learned

It’s worth stressing again that the message that came out from the day was not that everything that the teachers from Shanghai do is perfect. Fang spoke about how much he had learnt from his English hosts and was in awe of their ability to teach so many subjects. In Shanghai he only teach maths and for only three hours per day. The rest of his time would be spent marking, intervening with students, planning lessons and collaborating with colleagues. The cultural context is very different to what we experience in this country but there are lessons to be considered from his practice.

Firstly, notice the care with which the examples have been chosen. 25 x 28 is a really thoughtful choice that works well in illustrating a number of methods. This hasn’t happened by chance. There has been careful consideration about what is the best example to use to allow leaners to make sense of the maths. For example, 24 x 27 would not be nearly as good a choice!

This leads to a second key point – whilst mathematical problems in life won’t always be as neat as 25 x 28, the use of these numbers and the exploration of methods allows students to understand mathematical structure. This is particularly important as students will go on to use these same skills in algebra. For example, they will be expected to simplify 3 x 6n or multiply out 2(n + 4). We are part of students’ journeys in making sense of maths. Nothing we do with them is without consequence and what we teach should not just be to get them through this year.

Finally, the true/false concept clarification question was a really helpful tool in moving on understanding. This method helps satisfy the key aim of the Maths National Curriculum of developing students’ reasoning skills. Whilst looking at the problem the student I followed first assumed that she must be wrong and that the work on the board must be correct. However, by working with her partner they were able to build the confidence to understand the faulty reasoning.

If you have experiences of working with primary mathematics in a similar way, we would love to read your comments.

Reference

JERRIM, J. 2015. Why do East Asian children perform so well in PISA? An investigation of Western-born children of East Asian descent. Oxford Review of Education, 41, 310-333.

]]>http://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/primaryeducationnetwork/2018/01/16/mathematics-shanghai-style/feed/0Finding a place for inquiryhttp://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/primaryeducationnetwork/2017/12/05/finding-place-inquiry/
http://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/primaryeducationnetwork/2017/12/05/finding-place-inquiry/#respondTue, 05 Dec 2017 07:57:26 +0000http://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/primaryeducationnetwork/?p=2451The OECD have just published the results of the latest PISA survey on collaborative problem solving. In the accompanying editorial, its educational director, Andreas Schleicher points to the importance of communication-intensive activities in promoting effective collaboration and thereby preparation for a rapidly changing world of work. This is echoed by groups like the Partnership for ...

This is echoed by groups like the Partnership for 21st Century Learning who have produced a framework for learning that includes, alongside traditional disciplines, ‘learning and innovation skills’ such as problem solving and collaboration. Meanwhile, in England, the Ofsted Chief Inspector, Amanda Spielman recently caught the attention of educators with her commentary on the curriculum and her call for schools to move away from an obsession with test preparation and ‘badges and stickers’ to focus on the wider curriculum and the substance of education. So, what constitutes the ‘substance of education’?

In light of this, Rupert Knight argues in this post that part of any reappraisal and broadening of the scope of school learning might involve finding a place for learning through inquiry. He considers what all primary educators might learn from an example of a distinctive inquiry-based curriculum.

What do we mean by inquiry?

There are many definitions of what is usually known as inquiry-based learning but we can discern some common themes:

The use of pupils’ questions and ideas as a starting point

A commitment to pupil autonomy with teacher acting as facilitator or guide

The valuing of process (e.g. exploration, problem solving, collaboration) as well as content

The use of authentic, often real-world, contexts

This approach is frequently traced back to the early twentieth century writings of John Dewey, who established ‘progressive’ principles, such as learning from experience, relating learning to relevant contexts and allowing learners a degree of expression and freedom (Dewey, 1938). The ideas of Jerome Bruner (1966) on ensuring pupils’ active involvement in learning and an interest in process, as well as product have also been highly influential.

An example: the IB’s PYP

An ‘extreme’ example of this approach is the International Baccalaureate’s Primary Years Programme (PYP): a whole curriculum based around transdisciplinary units of inquiry, as illustrated in this film clip and outlined in great detail in this document. Inquiry, along with action and reflection, forms the core of PYP learning and is often conducted collaboratively. The school year is based around six sustained and highly structured units of inquiry, each with some form of principled action as an outcome. The PYP is fairly prevalent in private international schools globally. While there are many reasons – not least the National Curriculum and the current testing regime – why this curriculum is very rarely followed in the UK state sector (a recent search suggests just 2 or 3 IB accredited state primary schools), perhaps there are principles that can be taken and adapted in a more moderate form.

Why use inquiry anyway?

Supporters of this style of learning often point to benefits such as: preparing learners with requisite skills for employability, as outlined in this chapter from Brigid Barron & Linda Darling-Hammond from Stanford University, a sense of personal fulfilment as a learner through creative thinking, as cited by high-profile figures such as Sir Ken Robinson, or collaborative learning as a vehicle for a language-rich classroom, as promoted by Voice 21.

Persuasive though these arguments might be, inquiry-based learning has been strongly challenged, as seen in this article for The Conversation and in this paper by Kirschner et al. Criticisms centre on the existence of a strong evidence base for techniques based on direct (as opposed to ‘minimally guided’) instruction, chiefly because of the excessive demands placed on working memory by activities like problem-solving and working with new information. Others, as shown in this report from Canada, have argued that a focus on these generalised skills also risks marginalising the very subject matter and content that learners need as the underpinning for effective thinking and learning. Often, however, commentators seem to take a polarised view of education as being about either knowledge or skills, instead of considering how elements of inquiry might enhance a content-rich curriculum.

So, how can we strike a balance? It seems to me that there are three fundamental issues for teachers to resolve:

The place of substantive contentHow do we ensure adequate prior knowledge? Returning to our example of the PYP curriculum (IBO, 2009), lines of inquiry are highly structured and the prescribed planning process places great emphasis on a central idea, key concepts and ‘significant knowledge’.
However, if inquiry may not be the best way of acquiring new knowledge, perhaps it is better placed as a means of working with that knowledge and thereby developing a solid conceptual understanding. This has implications for the sequencing of a topic. Designing packaging for a product might be a fruitful scenario for inquiry but only after the pre-requisite skills such as accurate measuring, properties of 3D shapes, nets and so on have been taught, perhaps in a more directed way. The value of the inquiry would be in applying this knowledge to a new context. So it’s not a binary decision about content or process, but about the right place for each. As Dewey (1938: 78) himself reminded us: ’the problem of selection and organisation of subject-matter for learning is fundamental.’

The role of the teacher
The PYP teacher is emphatically a facilitator, attuned to the needs of the individual (IBO, 2009), but does this sort of learning have to be ‘minimally guided’, as characterised in Kirschner et al.’s article above? Pupil ownership of an inquiry is important, but parameters can be set. For example, one approach is to break inquiry into a series of brief episodes, punctuated by teacher-directed learning. Rather than a lengthy period with minimal intervention, the teacher can bring the class back together at regular intervals to take stock of progress, draw explicit attention to salient features, offer contingent guidance and move the learning on. Perhaps what we need to take from the PYP example is the fact that the teacher must ‘value and model’ inquiry: here is an opportunity to apply direct instruction (i.e. modelling) to the inquiry process itself. Again, we need to move beyond a false dichotomy of inquiry versus direct instruction and see how and where direct instruction can intersect with the inquiry process.

The alignment of assessment practices
How can we assess the inquiry process authentically? The first priority is to make it clear that we value process as well as product and there is plenty of emphasis within the current primary National Curriculum on processes: inquiry is mentioned explicitly within the Science and History framework and in other subjects there is reference to related skills, such as reasoning and problem solving (Mathematics) and designing products for a purpose (Design and Technology). The PYP (IBO, 2009) strongly emphasises frequent observation records and the compilation of pupil portfolios, practices familiar to all early years practitioners. Above all, ongoing teacher assessment needs to include, alongside more traditional testing, opportunities for ‘performances’ of understanding: applying knowledge to novel contexts, but with clearly specified criteria.

Robin Hood Primary School in Nottingham has been attempting to strike this balance and develop more opportunities for inquiry. Danielle White, a Year Three teacher shares her experiences and her journey as an educator:

So perhaps incorporating inquiry is not about a wholesale ideological embracing of this form of pedagogy, but about finding a sense of balance and appropriate place within the teacher’s repertoire. It would be great to hear of any examples you have of making inquiry work for you in the primary classroom, on however small a scale.

]]>http://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/primaryeducationnetwork/2017/12/05/finding-place-inquiry/feed/0The Never-Ending Story of EYFS Assessmenthttp://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/primaryeducationnetwork/2017/11/06/never-ending-story-eyfs-assessment/
http://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/primaryeducationnetwork/2017/11/06/never-ending-story-eyfs-assessment/#commentsMon, 06 Nov 2017 08:30:57 +0000http://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/primaryeducationnetwork/?p=2311In this post Philip Hood offers a perspective on EYFS assessment plans. In September in this blog series Helen Victoria Smith wrote about school readiness and aspects of the assessment system in the Early Years Foundation Stage. Since then the government has published a response to the Primary Assessment Consultation. You can see the full ...

In this post Philip Hood offers a perspective on EYFS assessment plans.

In September in this blog series Helen Victoria Smith wrote about school readiness and aspects of the assessment system in the Early Years Foundation Stage. Since then the government has published a response to the Primary Assessment Consultation. You can see the full document here. In this, to the apparent delight of the headteacher unions, the DfE has opted to end testing at seven… and instead introduce it at four.

Baseline: is it a new low point?

Unfortunately some of our headteachers appear to have taken their eyes off the ball here. It may be that a few hours spent tablet testing children within a few weeks of entering Reception seemed a good price to lay for the prize of no testing at the end of KS1. The following paragraph summarises the intention

‘The prime focus of the new assessment will be on skills which can be reliably assessed and which
correlate with attainment in English and mathematics at the end of key stage 2, most notably early
literacy and numeracy.’

The broader intention is to make comparisons from 2027 of how children have made progress from the start of Reception to the end of Year Six. This is a long way off which probably deflects many objections. But the here and now (from a pilot in 2019 and roll-out in 2020) is early testing, subsequent labelling, a narrower focus to plug the gaps together with a wash-back from other suggested measures (see below).

The case against.

If it is true that an early ability to use words and numbers, to read and write is the best predictor of later success, then it may just be that some children do have this early ability at this early age and some do not. The multitude of reasons why children differ so enormously at three and four in their knowledge, understanding and broad skills base does absolutely need full attention from all EYFS practitioners. But how do we gain from measuring in a very imperfect way (one-off testing is not proven to be reliable with young children) what is not there?

The implication is of course that if it is not there we need to put it there as soon as possible, or the child will be disadvantaged further. But a process which consists of saying that, as a certain pot doesn’t have something particular in it, we need to stuff it full of that material no matter what else is in there or what shape it is or how much room there is, could just be flawed. Maybe growing the pot over time and adding things which complement the existing contents (such as more language, social and personal skills and physical development) and doing this in a more thoughtful or even creative way, slightly more slowly, is a better recipe for the important purpose of ‘not breaking the pot’. So many children evolve visibly between three and six and pick up the reading and writing they need at their own pace and without the tension of being forced to ‘study’ in ways that are unnatural for their age and developmental stage. So few will be actually ‘behind’ at seven if they have the personalised programme the EYFS is intended to provide for its hundreds of thousands of unique children. For example in an article just published David Whitebread links play with mental health and well-being with many references to research studies. In so many countries with later attainment better than ours children simply do all of this later and there is no ‘readiness issue’. And apart from that discussion we are anyway left with the stark fact that a one-off test at four is not reliable – children of that age can do different things in different days as every practitioner knows. Coincidentally (or perhaps not) the government has also signed up to trial the OECD ‘Early Years PISA’ and a discussion of that by Peter Moss can be seen here.

What do we assess at age five?

But along with baseline testing come other adjustments to EYFS assessment. The good level of development measure at the end of Reception already excludes two of the seven areas of learning (and with that five of the seventeen Early Learning Goals) but the profile of all seventeen ELGs is likely to be reduced to just the twelve which constitute the GLD. Now there is a feeling that in the English education system if it moves, you test it, so the corollary of that is that if you’re not testing it it probably isn’t moving – so that could mean a much reduced emphasis on Understanding the World (that’s just the science, technology, history, geography, RE of the curriculum) and Expressive Arts and Design for all 3-5 year olds. The rationale behind this is that the government feel children need to focus more on Literacy and Mathematics. They feel that the EYFS curriculum does not prepare children well enough for KS1 and so the dreaded word ‘readiness’ surfaces again.

Yet good practitioners in EYFS would say these two areas of learning are vital because children find them deeply interesting and motivating and they form the content of the ‘what we did at school today’ chats to parents and carers in a way that phonics almost certainly does not. Indeed the best way into literacy and maths is through the content of those many and varied subjects contained in UW.

Is this inevitable?

In an informal conversation with a very eminent early childhood researcher this month, the point was made that there is no new argument; leading academics have been saying the same thing for years because the nature of early childhood and the nature of children’s needs, especially as regards how they best learn, do not change greatly over time even as society develops. The British Educational Research Association (BERA) early childhood SIG together with the early years organisation TACTYC this year produced a research review about the UK context between 2013 and 2015 which forms a useful summary, for example. We know all too well from experience that policy makers do not listen to research and the government response document references a single research article from 2007 as its evidence.

These changes, both in baseline and in the EYFS assessment system which will impact on curriculum, will happen very soon. It is really in the hands now of practitioners and headteachers who can stop this if they just believe enough that it is time to stand up and say that it is wrong and counter-productive, that it will lead to the opposite of what the government insists it wants and in the process make a lot of children and their teachers unhappy. There are many organisations which oppose these measures, but the more there are (showing how important this is), ironically, the slower they work. So it’s not the academics and not the teacher associations and Facebook groups which will make a difference. It is the concerned professional early childhood practitioner and the principled headteacher in your hundreds and thousands who can affect this. Over to you.

]]>http://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/primaryeducationnetwork/2017/11/06/never-ending-story-eyfs-assessment/feed/3How dogs could make children better readershttp://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/primaryeducationnetwork/2017/10/02/how-dogs-could-make-children-better-readers/
http://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/primaryeducationnetwork/2017/10/02/how-dogs-could-make-children-better-readers/#commentsMon, 02 Oct 2017 07:00:35 +0000http://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/primaryeducationnetwork/?p=2181In this post, which has previously appeared on The Conversation’s site, Gill Johnson considers the use of dogs within education as a way of promoting reading. (Bark and Read – H.Hudson / The Kennel Club) Issues around children learning to read are rarely out of the news. Which is hardly surprising – becoming a ...

In this post, which has previously appeared on The Conversation’s site, Gill Johnson considers the use of dogs within education as a way of promoting reading.

(Bark and Read – H.Hudson / The Kennel Club)

Issues around children learning to read are rarely out of the news. Which is hardly surprising – becoming a successful reader is of paramount importance in improving a child’s life chances. Nor is it surprising that reading creates a virtuous circle: the more you read the better you become. But what may come as a surprise is that reading to dogs is gaining popularity as a way of addressing concerns about children’s reading

.

(Bark and Read – H Hudson / The Kennel Club)

There is a lot of research evidence indicating that children who read extensively have greater academic success. The UK Department for Education’s Reading for Pleasure report, published in 2012, highlights this widely established link.

Keith Stanovich, an internationally eminent US literacy scholar (now based in Canada) wrote a widely-cited paper in 1986, describing this virtuous circle as the “Matthew effect” (a reference to the observations made by Jesus in the New Testament about the economic propensity for the rich to become richer and the poor, poorer). A downward spiral impacts upon reading ability and then, according to Stanovich, on cognitive capability.

Underachievement in groups of children in the UK is recognised in international studies – and successive governments have sought to address the issues in a range of ways. Reading to dogs, so far, has not been among them, but it’s time to look at the strategy more seriously.

Many children naturally enjoy reading and need little encouragement, but if they are struggling their confidence can quickly diminish – and with it their motivation. This sets in motion the destructive cycle whereby reading ability fails to improve.

So how can dogs help?

A therapeutic presence

Reading to dogs is just that – encouraging children to read alongside a dog. The practice originated in the US in 1999 with the Reading Education Assistance Dogs (READ) scheme and initiatives of this type now extend to a number of countries. In the UK, for example, the Bark and Read scheme supported by the Kennel Club is meeting with considerable enthusiasm.

The presence of dogs has a calming effect on many people – hence their use in Pets as Therapy schemes (PAT). Many primary schools are becoming increasingly pressurised environments and children (like adults) generally do not respond well to such pressure. A dog creates an environment that immediately feels more relaxed and welcoming. Reading can be a solitary activity, but can also be a pleasurable, shared social event. Children who are struggling to read benefit from the simple pleasure of reading to a loyal, loving listener.

Children who are struggling to read, for whatever reason, need to build confidence and rediscover a motivation for reading. A dog is a reassuring, uncritical audience who will not mind if mistakes are made. Children can read to the dog, uninterrupted; comments will not be made. Errors can be addressed in other contexts at other times. For more experienced or capable readers, they can experiment with intonation and “voices”, knowing that the dog will respond positively – and building fluency further develops comprehension in readers.

For children who are struggling, reconnecting with the pleasure of reading is very important. As Marylyn Jager-Adams,a literacy scholar, noted in a seminal review of beginner reading in the US: “If we want children to learn to read well, we must find a way to induce them to read lots.”

Reading to a dog can create a helpful balance, supporting literacy activities which may seem less appealing to a child. Children with dyslexia, for example, need focused support to develop their understanding of the alphabetic code (how speech sounds correspond to spelling choices). But this needs to be balanced with activities which support independent reading and social enjoyment or the child can become demotivated.

Creating a virtuous circle

Breaking a negative cycle will inevitably lead to the creation of a virtuous circle – and sharing a good book with a dog enables children to apply their reading skills in a positive and enjoyable way.

Research evidence in this area is rather limited, despite the growing popularity of the scheme. A 2016 systematic review of 48 studies – Children Reading to Dogs: A Systematic Review of the Literature by Hall, Gee and Mills – demonstrated some evidence for improvement in reading, but the evidence was not strong. There clearly is more work to do, but interest in reading to dogs appears to have grown through the evidence of case studies.

The example, often cited in the media, is that of Tony Nevett and his greyhound Danny. Tony and Danny’s involvement in a number of schools has been transformative, not only in terms of reading but also in promoting general well-being and positive behaviour among children with a diverse range of needs.

So, reading to dogs could offer many benefits. As with any approach or intervention, it is not a panacea – but set within a language-rich literacy environment, there appears to be little to lose and much to gain.

]]>http://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/primaryeducationnetwork/2017/10/02/how-dogs-could-make-children-better-readers/feed/2What do we mean by school-ready?http://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/primaryeducationnetwork/2017/09/04/mean-school-ready/
http://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/primaryeducationnetwork/2017/09/04/mean-school-ready/#commentsMon, 04 Sep 2017 07:03:55 +0000http://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/primaryeducationnetwork/?p=2121 This September, most 4 year old children in the UK will start school for the first-time. Due to the offer of free childcare places for all 3 to 4 year olds, most of these will have experienced being in some sort educational environment although these will differ greatly. In addition, their home experiences ...

This September, most 4 year old children in the UK will start school for the first-time. Due to the offer of free childcare places for all 3 to 4 year olds, most of these will have experienced being in some sort educational environment although these will differ greatly. In addition, their home experiences will be diverse. In this post Helen Victoria Smith considers school-readiness and the need for clarity about this concept.

Imagine two children about to start school. They are both five years old and are eagerly anticipating their first day. Imagine that each brings with them to school a virtual schoolbag full of things they have learned at home, with their friends, and in and from the world in which they live (Thomson, 2002, p.2)

As Pat Thomson illustrates above, children arrive at school with different virtual schoolbags which shape their experience of it. An example of this can be seen in Shirley Brice Heath’s (1983) famous study of the desegregation of two culturally different communities in the USA, which revealed how children learned to use language in very different ways, and how this affected the ways they experienced school. As a result, teachers and academics began to question how they could best meet the needs of these children. In other words, they wanted to know how schools could be made ready for children.

But there has been a shift.

Started in 1997 and concluded in 2014, the Evaluation of Preschool, Primary and Secondary Education (EPPSE) project found that a child’s home learning environment significantly influenced their development. In the early years, activities such as reading regularly to a child, taking them to the library, teaching numbers and nursery rhymes, painting, drawing and singing were found to be more important for children’s intellectual and social development than parental occupation, education or income. In other words if parents could be encouraged to do the ‘right’ things with their child before they started school, then they would be more likely to succeed. Furthermore, they found that children who attended a high-quality preschool, especially if they were from a disadvantaged background, would be more able to keep up with their better-off peers when they started school. These findings have strongly influenced different UK governments over the past 20 years, who have emphasised the importance of the early years for children’s academic and future economic success. This has led to the expansion of free childcare places, early intervention (e.g. Sure Start) and an increased focus on parental involvement in children’s education. As a result, it seems that the question now being asked is:

How can children be made ready for school?

This has huge implications, not least for the children, but also for those working with them. In an educational climate where schools and their teachers are judged according to the educational attainment and progress of their children, children who are not seen to be ready to school at the age of 4 become a ‘problem’ needing to be fixed. And as a result, parents and early-years professionals come under increasing pressure to make sure children in their care are on course to reach a ‘good level of development’ by the time they finish their first year of schooling. If they fail to do so, they are at risk of being blamed and vilified, as can be seen in news reports with headlines such as ‘Nurseries not preparing children for school’, ‘Boys trail girls in literacy and numeracy when starting school’ and ‘A third of children not ‘school-ready’ for Reception’.

However, what is also evident in these reports is that there isn’t an agreed definition of what children actually need to be able to do to be school-ready. While some focus on social and personal skills, others focus on literacy and numeracy skills.

In England, the Statutory Framework for the Early Years Foundation Stage (DfE, 2017) sets out seven areas of learning for children aged 0 to 5 that early years’ providers must follow and assess children against. This document defines a ‘good level of development’ (GLD) at the end of this stage as achieving (at least) the expected level in the five areas of communication and language; physical development; personal, social and emotional development; literacy and maths. If children have a ‘good level of development’ then they are considered to have the skills needed to access the Key Stage 1 (ages 5-7) primary curriculum (DfE, 2013). However, starting school in England means entering a Reception class (in the school year in which the child turns 5) not the start of Key Stage 1. So this definition is not particularly helpful in establishing an understanding of ‘school-ready’ for the vast majority of children who enter school at the age of 4.

Schools and early-years providers are therefore having to turn to other organisations to help them define ‘school-readiness’. PACEY (Professional Association for Childcare and Early Years) have produced materials for parents and professionals to help them understand what a child needs to do to be school-ready. In 2013, they also produced a report into what parents, professionals and children felt being school-ready meant. Not surprisingly, they found that many different definitions exist, but that the people in their study focused on social skills, independence and a curiosity to learn, rather than more academic skills and knowledge. Meanwhile, the Department for Education includes ‘beginning to read and write and use numbers’ in their definition,

In their first few years children learn to walk and run, to speak and communicate, to relate to others, to play, explore their own curiosity, and to enjoy learning through their play, as well as beginning to read and write and use numbers. They are the key elements of ‘school readiness’. (DfE, 2011, p.18)

So what now?

As long as what it means to be school-ready remains fuzzy and contested, teachers, parents and early years’ professionals are likely to be unsure about how best to support young children. For children who are already disadvantaged, this could mean struggling to adapt to the demands of the school curriculum and falling behind their peers. It is important that as practitioners and parents, we take time to consider what we mean by being school-ready. Maybe the questions we should be asking are:

What do we want our children to be able to do when they start school?

How can we support them, their parents and early years’ professionals so they have a strong start to their school life?

References

DfE (2011) Supporting Families in the Foundation Years. London: Department for Education.